Why? Dr. Simpson has repeatedly shown to be shareholder unfriendly.
She needs this reverse split to happen. If the shareholders reject it, again, maybe she takes the company into bankruptcy out of spite?
Nothing would happen to the patent. She'd line up DIP financing and would get the money she needs to resume operations, and there would be many lenders willing to provide that financing as it would supersede the noteholders. The shareholders who "screwed" her over by rejecting the reverse split would be the big losers, at least in her mind, so it would be a win-win.
Not to mention that she would probably keep her job and be issued new shares so she wouldn't end up losing out. She only has 40k or so shares right now, it's not like she has much to lose.
I don't think BK is likely either, but it's certainly an option that is on the table. If she truly is getting lowball offers, which I suspect she is right now because she has zero leverage, why wouldn't she want to file BK, try to restructure the debt, keep the company alive until FDA approval and negotiate a sale on her terms?
The only variable that would change is who the beneficiaries would be when the sale happens. Traditionally, old shareholders are wiped out and the creditors become the new shareholders. Do you really think Simpson cares if we are the ones to benefit from a sale or if it's the creditors?
My point was that if BK does happen, the shareholders' best chance of recovery is to try and force the courts to order a market test of the assets. If they exceed the value of the debt, either sell them and pay out the debt that way, or use it as leverage to renegotiate terms with the creditors (i.e. a partial debt for equity swap that leaves current shareholders only minimally diluted.
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
